PDA

View Full Version : Shadowrun Weapon-maker



Krimm_Blackleaf
2009-05-10, 04:57 PM
I am playing Shadowrun with a few friends of mine every Thursday night, and so far everyone in the group feels like an adequate player with the exception of one. Our party rigger basically does two things; he puts new devices on his super-armored van and he drives the group around. He is wishing he could do more, but we're all just a little new to the game(except one of us) and he hasn't been able to find his niche. I came up with the idea of him producing very unusual weaponry, things like grenades or missiles with high explosives, and coated in a gel-pack filled with napalm and nails or armor-piercing bullets that hold an electrical charge. I suppose just stuff that they would put you away for a long long time for if they found you possessing it.
So what I would like is people with interesting ideas for weaponry, or just anything that would allow our rigger to feel useful in combat. Much of the other ideas I've thought of are also taken from Fallout 3, just so you know I've mined that one clean.

Swordguy
2009-05-10, 05:15 PM
3e or 4e? There's actually weapon-making rules in the Cannon Companion for 3e...

Krimm_Blackleaf
2009-05-10, 05:25 PM
3e or 4e? There's actually weapon-making rules in the Cannon Companion for 3e...

Oh, should have mentioned. 4e.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-10, 06:20 PM
Making weapons sounds incredibly dull. If done at the table, it just wastes everyone's time and isn't actually even remotely exciting. Bad idea.

Why doesn't the GM include action scenes involving your vehicle, and why doesn't your rigger diversify to being a hacker (in fact, I can't see why anyone would bother with one but not the other, since they use almost all the same things), and why doesn't your rigger get some armed drones to use for scouting and combat alongside the rest of the party?

As far as custom explosives and weapons go, it's obviously up to the GM. The player and the GM would have to work out details. FWIW there's gun customization rules in Arsenal.

Krimm_Blackleaf
2009-05-10, 06:25 PM
That's true, but I was thinking in-game input for items to make would be good. Say for something we need within the week or even a day or two, but it really isn't necessary.
The DM could put more vehicular action in, it would make him THE most useful character in the fight... but as for hacking, he's actually a secondary hacker but the technomancer has him utterly beat in all respects when it comes to hacking, obviously. That could very well be why he isn't quite as useful, since he spent so many points on something he has literally never ever used.

Another_Poet
2009-05-10, 10:44 PM
why doesn't your rigger get some armed drones to use for scouting and combat alongside the rest of the party?

This.

This way the rigger can always participate in combat.

Xuincherguixe
2009-05-11, 02:42 PM
Really, riggers that are away from combat don't tend to go very well in the game. Part of why decking changed. I would say that perhaps you should put something of a limit on the range of drones. Even if it doesn't necessarily make sense. A somewhat more complicated version would be that he can't "jump into" the drone at more than say... 20 meters. And must give very specific orders, which cannot be very complicated.

Another possibility, load up the drones with various situationally useful utilities. I don't have a lot of 4th edition books, so I don't know if there's anything like Holographic generators you could equip your drones with. Even then though, you could load them with smoke grenades, or better yet, poison gas grenades. You could give it speakers. When you need a distraction you could have them blare out some Goblin Rock. (What is the difference between Goblin Rock and Troll Thrash Metal anyways?) Less overt a distraction would be to have it play deceptive conversations.

"Alright, we'll head around this corner and blow open the door."
"Geek the Mage."
"We found what we're looking for. Let's blow before the Five-O show up."
"OH GOD WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?"

Things that are fairly reasonable for Shadowrunners to say. Of course, they are no where near that location.

That kind of thinking goes a long way in making a Rigger as versatile as a Magician. Though it's not a particularly well supported way of playing. It is however one of the best ways of getting use out of your drones.

The other obvious thing to do, have a swarm of drones around doing surveillance. When guards are approaching, you can warn the team. Maybe the facility isn't kind enough to put cameras everywhere for your decker. If you can have RD-D2 peeking around corners it could go a long way in eliminating blind spots.

The rigger could also pick up a number of social skills. Really everyone should have those, but Face is a role that tends not to require much equipment. Or even Karma really. Grab some knowledge skills too.

If the game moves more towards prep time, Riggers and Deckers get to really shine. Mind you, harder with Riggers since it takes a bit of imagination.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-11, 03:19 PM
This.

This way the rigger can always participate in combat.

Although, really, combat shouldn't be prominent enough that being unable to perform directly in combat is a big deal. That's why it's so lethal. Cyberpunk action can be much more fun, anyway. (cf. the whole Bridge trilogy.)

The way the net has been integrated (very realistically, concept-wise) into the world makes it impossible for me to see anyone not giving a character at least some net capability and basic programs, unless the character is some kind of luddite or other philosophical offliner (or maybe physically unable to use the net)...


As far as limiting drones go, I can't see any reason to ever do that. There's no way a shadowrunner can get enough hardware to outgun even a small corporation or a local police department - if they do, it's the GM's fault (either for giving them too much money and too easy access to gear, or for making the opposition unrealistically weak).

The whole point of cyberpunk (which, yes, Shadowrun has always slightly missed, although this style is not in my opinion suggested or enforced by the books, but rather developed by players) is to make do with little; ingenuity, grit, and bad-assness make up for the lack of heavy weapons and expensive gear.

Of course, you can also play the serious special-ops style game, but then you should be up against enemies so tough and big that you need all the high-tech super gear you can get to even have a chance.


Really, the way the game works, it should be perfectly reasonable to play a hacker/rigger/hacker-rigger who never leaves his hideout and takes part in operations in other countries altogether. (And when the opposition tracks him down to his home and launches a low-orbit flight to release some gunship drones and troop transports over his location, things really get interesting!)

BRC
2009-05-11, 04:31 PM
Personally, I would go one of three routes.
1: Chip in to get your rigger some programs, have him spend some Karma on skills, and let him double as a hacker.
2: Drones man, Drones. Big ones with shotguns, small ones with tranq darts, ect.

I personally wouldn't go the Weapon-maker route, because it dosn't solve the problem. The problem is that the Rigger is just sitting around while the team is off doing cool things, this is boring for whoever plays the Rigger. It's not that he isn't contributing to the team, he is, a good getaway is one of the most important parts of any job. He wants to feel "useful in combat", but building nifty weapons for his teammates to use won't make him feel useful in combat. The only way to feel useful in combat (Note, this is different from being useful in combat), is to actually take part in it yourself. Either by hacking the IR systems of the people trying to shoot at you, or by sitting back and remotely controlling your T-500 Face-Rearranger to remove anything that needs removal.


Personally, I would go with the Hacker option (unless you already have one of those), because it has alot of utility, and because making people's cyberlimbs lock up is much funnier than simply shooting them.

Swordguy
2009-05-11, 09:10 PM
Fair warning: playing a drone rigger who doesn't run around with the rest of the party is associated with a high level of GM annoyance, often expressed by cruise missile strikes that trace your signal, or counter-rigger fire teams storming your "safe" house.

The issue is that there just isn't a good way to challenge a drone rigger who sits in a van all the time. Much of the challenge in any RPG comes from physical danger to the character, and there isn't any when your PC is sitting a half-mile away from the action. You're either participating and completely safe, or you aren't participating at all (jamming your signal or the like), or you're dead (aforementioned missiles or strike teams that target your meat body while you're jacked in). The GM just doesn't have any other real options to challenge or threaten your PC.

Take advantage of the wireless 'net in 4e and make sure your rigger, should you choose to play one, goes out with the rest of the party and doesn't sit in a van or a safe house somewhere. Your GM will thank you, and you won't get frustrated when your GM is forced to effectively arbitrarily kill your PC to do anything to you.

Crow
2009-05-11, 09:30 PM
I'm going to add to the Drone-Rigger chorus.

It is true that they can be a GM annoyance, but the Gm should also realize that they shouldn't be tracing the rigger's signal every single mission just to screw him over. Trust me, you will screw him over enough when you begin trashing his high-priced state of the art combat drones.

This is SHADOWRUN. Nuyen is more valuable that human life because human life stinks, and more Nuyen is the only way to improve it. Everytime the drone rigger loses one of his drones, sure, he is alive and well. But he's also returning to his dumpy D-scale apartment with attached garage and rationed water times, because he had to spend Nuyen from the mission to replace his equipment rather than upgrade his digs.

I mean I don't really know how much the mood has changed now that SR is up to 4e, but back when I started in 2e, people were running the shadows because they didn't care about whether they live or die apart from how it relates to getting the next payout.

As another GM tip, remember that Riggers can jack into a building's entire security system and run it. It is OK to make up missions that will require your rigger to get on site and take control of the building's security systems. This will involve the Rigger, get him on-site, and give him a way to participate in the action as he uses the building's drones and automated defenses to help the team in firefights and such. Plus, since he is jacked into the system, he can know ahead of time of teams coming to take his jacked-in ass out. Then he gets to have nasty firefights between his hijacked security systems and corporate goon squads sent to kick him out.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-12, 03:28 AM
The issue is that there just isn't a good way to challenge a drone rigger who sits in a van all the time. Much of the challenge in any RPG comes from physical danger to the character, and there isn't any when your PC is sitting a half-mile away from the action. You're either participating and completely safe, or you aren't participating at all (jamming your signal or the like), or you're dead (aforementioned missiles or strike teams that target your meat body while you're jacked in). The GM just doesn't have any other real options to challenge or threaten your PC.

Sure the GM does. Those are great (and realistic) threats, and work for hackers. Realistically, the immense majority of hackers would do their hacking from a hide-out far away - probably on the other side of the world. The target of their hacking would try to identify and locate the hacker and activate local resources (possibly not their own) against them. After the first time the strike team tracks down and neutralizes your solitary rigger/hacker, your next one will stay very close to the rest of the team for protection.

Heck, the opening story in the 4E book has this happen to the rigger waiting in the car.

It's a cyberpunk game - the GM is supposed to be unfair. What's this about "challenging" them? Actions get reactions, and when megacorps react to you, you turn into a damp spot on the floor. Sitting alone at home or in a vehicle and poking the megacorp (or other target) with a sharp stick is a great way to get killed, and the GM should either warn the player - or, preferrably, just show them.

But the other side of that is that the players - or their characters, rather - get to be unfair. If they figure out a clever way to avoid any and all risk and do their job, that's not a bad thing - that's what they were supposed to do! Hopefully you came up with a good enough set-up that they at least feel clever and accomplished. Then you just serve them a curveball down the road to make things even more interesting.

Like Crow points out, when each shot is wrecking tens of thousands worth of hardware, you get clever and cautious about what you do. Waving a gun sometimes becomes a better option, financially. And yes, all sensitive and important systems are going to be wireless-incapable and connected over cables. (Pretty sure the 4E book explicitly acknowledged this in the section about security systems etc.? If not, well, they're only as stupid as the people who made CP2020, who thought that all corporate systems would be connected to the Matrix, rather than in their own LANs and WANs...)

Xuincherguixe
2009-05-12, 01:52 PM
As far as limiting drones go, I can't see any reason to ever do that. There's no way a shadowrunner can get enough hardware to outgun even a small corporation or a local police department - if they do, it's the GM's fault (either for giving them too much money and too easy access to gear, or for making the opposition unrealistically weak).

To be fair, if you're replying to me. I was suggesting limiting their usefulness at a range, forcing the Rigger to be close to his drones.

In theory you could then have them peek around corners, but not disable bombs from a few blocks away.

They could still be useful, drones, but some punk could still come up and shoot them in the face in a slightly less arbitrary fashion.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-12, 02:23 PM
To be fair, if you're replying to me. I was suggesting limiting their usefulness at a range, forcing the Rigger to be close to his drones.

In theory you could then have them peek around corners, but not disable bombs from a few blocks away.

They could still be useful, drones, but some punk could still come up and shoot them in the face in a slightly less arbitrary fashion.

That's exactly what I was replying to. I don't see any reason to ever do that. Not arbitrarily and universally, anyway. There can certainly be legitimate reasons why, in some situations, you can't get a wireless signal into a specific area from outside it - but continuously negating a specific PC's specific abilities isn't fun. (Unless it makes sense. If the party's hacker likes to hack enemies' gear, once the enemy figure it out they shut down their wireless.)

Safety in numbers is more than enough reason to stick with the rest of the team, and if a GM is too wimpy to enforce that, they're too wimpy to GM cyberpunk. This is the genre that started with people being hit with huge ice meteors fired by orbital guns because they pissed off rich people.